Ted
-
Posts
381 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Project Database
User Guide
Store
Events
Posts posted by Ted
-
-
Prolly coser to 70...
-
1 hour ago, joeDowntown said:
Still kicking the idea around. Flaherty and Collins has been really active over the midwest over the last couple of years. I wonder if they still have any interest in this project?
Joe
Nothing will happen on this site until the City has moved off the site.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, whitemice said:
That's not fair. Almost everyone does.
The issue is with competing wants. Humans have no fundamental requirement to be intellectually coherent.
The issue is that people want control more than they want other things.
Nearly everyone - hey, I'm chair of Neighborhood Association, I know - also wants "neighborhood level investment".
They do, honestly.And they want control.
When I was younger I had a mentor who was a Southern Baptist Preacher in a former life.
One of his favorite sayings was regarding alter calls: "Everyone wants a life changing experience, so long as nothing changes."
It explains a lot; I've appropriated his quote.Recognizing this conundrum - as immensely frustrating as it is - is key to understanding the failure of municipal government / "local control".
People can have genuinely good intentions; and those same people can be the greatest obstacle to the possibility of better outcomes.
Because - see the important detail - the possibility of better outcomes is the only thing any plan, policy, or program can ever offer.
And people who want control more than other things - those people want a guarantee.
Reality is like Sauron: "Surety you crave! Sauron gives none." (The Mouth).
It takes courage to live in such a world. If you want people to be courageous you need leadership. This is Grand Rapids (and not much different than most other cities).
Right. Everyone wants it just not enough to do anything to achieve it.
Our city has it as a goal but actively hinders it though policy.
I think our desires are clear through our actions and our policy.
-
1
-
-
Grand Rapids doesn't want affordable housing.
-
3
-
-
Funny. I rode by yesterday morning and thought it was looking great.
-
1
-
-
On 2/4/2019 at 9:53 AM, wingbert said:
I was under the impression that this type of situation would motivate you to take the bus or ride your bike.
It motivates me.
-
2 hours ago, JoeSchmo said:
How so? Just curious.
What would that look like?
Jen Keesmaat in Toronto.
3 hours ago, organsnyder said:They don't have the power (and/or the willpower) to truly hassle anyone with deep pockets.
They have the power.
-
47 minutes ago, wingbert said:
In some cases (cough Azzar cough) I don’t think they are hassling some people enough.
That's the point. They have all the tools to solve those problems - right now.
-
21 hours ago, uncus said:
Ok. But I’m curious why you think so.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkOur current zoning ordinance is overly complex at best. These additions will only make it more complex to navigate and more difficult to achieve quality urban results.
Nextly, I'm increasingly concerned about our decisions and attempts to manage social issues through our planning department through policy. The weed ordinance is another example. Our planning department should be working in our community to envision our future not being a cop for a (perceived) problem that doesn't solve itself through increasing land values.
Then, we don't need the city to have more ways to hassel folks in our city. They have more than enough.
-
1
-
-
This is a really bad idea...
-
20 hours ago, scottythe1nonly said:
This is a rendering from 2015 by Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr & Huber, showing how this property could be tied into other sites along the river. It obviously leans heavily on public space and amenities that reward those who want to enjoy the river. It will be interesting to see how close any eventual finished development will be to this concept. This is a lot of frontage on the Grand and it could go a long way to transforming the way we access and enjoy the river in the near future.
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/05/grand_river_restoration_update.html
Rendering by Interface Studio as part of GRForward. http://interface-studio.com/projects/grand-rapids
-
21 hours ago, joeDowntown said:
Save the Reptile House. And Skateboarding is not a crime!
Joe
+1
No way this project happens.
-
2
-
-
21 hours ago, x99 said:
It wouldn't. The eyesore on Diamond (with due apologies to Ted Lott) was approved in a different era, before the Secretary's Standards were substantially revised with an aim toward providing guidance that would prohibit intrusive modernist buildings into historic districts.
Hey, Ryan!
We've been through this before, haven't we?
There have been no changes to the Secretary's Standards since we did our project. You're wrong.
-
2
-
-
10 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:
I heard skateboarding is not a crime.
It's true.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, joeDowntown said:
Skateboarding is not a crime.
Skateboarding is not a crime.
-
3
-
-
11 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:
The city of Grand Rapids is only about 1/2 the Silver Line route along South Division. Does Wyoming have restrictive zoning that is blocking development?
Wyoming and Kentwood are trying to change but I don't think they've succeeded yet.
-
42 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:
The city doesn't build apartments...
I think that if developers/investors thought building apartments along South Division was a good move, they would have done so already. But nothing has been built. Wonder why?
I can maybe see that as a possibility on the West Side along the Laker Line, but land is pretty scarce, unless Lincoln Country Club sells. Apparently the property behind Meijer and LMD is proposed to have a mixed-use TOD concept with apartments. Apartments out at GVSU's campus are way overbuilt IMO. It's going to take some time to absorb all the new projects.
One reason apartments haven't been built along Division is that our zoning ordinance hasn't been modified to align with our transit investments. Any project of any size and will be a site by site battle for density increases. Costly and time consuming.
It's a problem.
-
1
-
-
On 2/11/2017 at 10:42 AM, Prankster said:
City can’t fix the parking problem it created
Wow, the grbj really rips into the city about this one.
GRBJ has quite literally been writing this same opinion piece since the '80's
-
2 hours ago, mpchicago said:
I wonder how they will handle this when they de-skin....I assume it was repaired with cinder block? I, don't know.
I suggest something like this...
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:
I don't know if what's posted on the city's site is the whole submittal. I've gone to commission meetings, actually most commission meetings, where they present way more than what was in the agenda packet. But I guess since you guys got so beat up over Twelve Weston, you want the same scrutiny for this project?
Haha.
Shouldn't this process to have some consistency?
-
48 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:
You know for a fact that that's the case?
I don't see it in their submittal, do you?
-
15 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:
Uhhh, they did. This was back with the first proposal. My guess is they probably want to get feedback on the changes before they invest more time in renderings? (I would anyway) Or maybe they'll bring them to the meeting on the 5th.
42 stories is a big deal. The idea that they're not able/willing to invest in their public presentation graphics to properly showcase their design changes in the best possible light is short sighted and ridiculous.
-
Funny that nowhere in the submittal do they show a full color rendering of the building, on the proposed site, with its neighbors.
Not cool that they're able to even get an audience with this level of detail.
-
This is a colossal jack...
New projects on the West Side
in Grand Rapids
Posted · Edited by Ted
LOL